Pack a Gun to Protect Valuables from Airline Theft or Loss?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Ray Fischer on 25 Jan 2010 12:46 C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >On 2010-01-24 21:18:54 -0800, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said: > >> C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said: >>>> C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said: >>>>>> Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote: >>>>>>> Savageduck >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yeeeees, but all of this is still hypothetical, and there is still no >>>>>>>> proof of intent to smuggle a weapon into Canada and possess it >>>>>>>> illegally. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They don't need to do that. >>>>>>> You and your unlicensed firearm are in Canada. That is illegal. >>>>>> >>>>>> Technically no, it is not in Canada. People and goods are not in >>>>>> Canada until they clear immigration and customs. >>>>> >>>>> Technically they are in Canada. >>>> >>>> Not according to the law. Airports set aside areas that are legally >>>> outside of the host country. >>> >>> Myth. >> >> Nope. > >If you guys are thinking of the customs holding areas that are common >in international airports, those areas are within the territorial >limits of the host nation and subject to its laws. Laws which set aside holding areas as being subject to different standards that areas outside of those holding areas. > They are not legally >"outside of the host country." Says who? -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: Chris H on 25 Jan 2010 15:03 In message <2010012509083570933-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> writes >On 2010-01-25 08:51:32 -0800, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> said: > >> In message <2010012508394329560-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> writes >>> On 2010-01-25 08:18:04 -0800, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> said: >>>> I realise the US finds people guilty, executes them and then >>>> identifies >>>> them.... Often without even bothering any legal system. >>> You appear to be totally ignorant of the US Legal system, and you >>>are >>> basing your opinion on that ignorance. >> Not at all... seen it in action first hand. (And I don't mean on TV) > >Oh! OK, do tell us of your experience with the US Legal system. >...and please, no third party, "I know somebody, or I was told" story, >you have "seen it in action first hand" after all. Mainly in the middle east... shoot first and call the dead civilians "suspected terrorists" >> BTW how many US Drone strikes have there been ion the last 10 days >>on >> "suspected terrorists" Ie Civilians who are killed, then identified and >> then accused of probably being terrorists (those they can still >> identify) women and children too. > >That is a different issue which has nothing to do with the discussion >regarding Courts and extradition. > >Those darn civilians should stop carrying AK47's Tell that to gun owners in the Usa.... -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
From: mrbawana2u on 25 Jan 2010 15:41 On Jan 25, 12:18 am, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovet...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said: > >> C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovet...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >>> rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) said: > >>>> Chris H <ch...(a)phaedsys.org> wrote: > >>>>> Savageduck > > >>>>>> Yeeeees, but all of this is still hypothetical, and there is still no > >>>>>> proof of intent to smuggle a weapon into Canada and possess it > >>>>>> illegally. > > >>>>> They don't need to do that. > >>>>> You and your unlicensed firearm are in Canada. That is illegal. > > >>>> Technically no, it is not in Canada. People and goods are not in > >>>> Canada until they clear immigration and customs. > > >>> Technically they are in Canada. > > >> Not according to the law. Airports set aside areas that are legally > >> outside of the host country. > > >Myth. > > Nope. prove it, You ancient, brain dead retard.
From: tony cooper on 25 Jan 2010 15:44 On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:03:10 +0000, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote: >In message <2010012509083570933-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck ><savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> writes >>On 2010-01-25 08:51:32 -0800, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> said: >> >>> In message <2010012508394329560-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck >>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> writes >>>> On 2010-01-25 08:18:04 -0800, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> said: >>>>> I realise the US finds people guilty, executes them and then >>>>> identifies >>>>> them.... Often without even bothering any legal system. >>>> You appear to be totally ignorant of the US Legal system, and you >>>>are >>>> basing your opinion on that ignorance. >>> Not at all... seen it in action first hand. (And I don't mean on TV) >> >>Oh! OK, do tell us of your experience with the US Legal system. >>...and please, no third party, "I know somebody, or I was told" story, >>you have "seen it in action first hand" after all. > >Mainly in the middle east... shoot first and call the dead civilians >"suspected terrorists" So your "first hand experience" is *not* with the US legal system, but the US military system in active combat. Yet another Chris H. misrepresentation. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Chris H on 25 Jan 2010 16:02
In message <ah0sl59d4a05ad2mf9lgimcrv7cs6895av(a)4ax.com>, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> writes >On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:03:10 +0000, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> >wrote: > >>In message <2010012509083570933-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck >><savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> writes >>>On 2010-01-25 08:51:32 -0800, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> said: >>> >>>> In message <2010012508394329560-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck >>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> writes >>>>> On 2010-01-25 08:18:04 -0800, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org> said: >>>>>> I realise the US finds people guilty, executes them and then >>>>>> identifies >>>>>> them.... Often without even bothering any legal system. >>>>> You appear to be totally ignorant of the US Legal system, and you >>>>>are >>>>> basing your opinion on that ignorance. >>>> Not at all... seen it in action first hand. (And I don't mean on TV) >>> >>>Oh! OK, do tell us of your experience with the US Legal system. >>>...and please, no third party, "I know somebody, or I was told" story, >>>you have "seen it in action first hand" after all. >> >>Mainly in the middle east... shoot first and call the dead civilians >>"suspected terrorists" > >So your "first hand experience" is *not* with the US legal system, but >the US military system in active combat. Yet another Chris H. >misrepresentation. Now thiat is the problem... Give a US serviceman a gun and put him outside the US and it is "active combat" no matter what the rules of engagement. They shoot first and call anything they hit a "suspected terrorist". Most of us call it murder. Were I was it was NOT "active combat". They just murdered civilians can called them "suspected terrorists". -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ |